Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
a little bit of revenue. of course, president obama is saying a million conciliatory things. here comes john boehner deciding he's going to draw a line again. >> without spending cuts and in title reforms it's impossible to address our country's debt crisis and get our economy going again and to grow jobs. right now all eyes are on the white house. the country doesn't need a victory lap. it needs leadership. it's time for the president congressional democrats to tell the american people what spending cuts they're really willing to make. >> cenk: there he goes again spending cuts, enexcitement reform. we'll get to entitlement reform in a minute. they are huffing and puffing and laughing in tim geithner's face today. based on some articles that i have read, this morning i tweeted out: there is the unknown ones, how much are they going to increase taxes. i predicted 37-38% and capitol gains 20%-22%. i don't have definitive numbers for you sos i got it right but i read this today: >> cenk: now do you understand that? the clinton era rates are 39.5 wear. all along, president obama was saying
obama would be more progressive because he wouldn't have to face re-election. i thought that was very unlikely. color me surprised. because it turns out president obama is more progressive! and a little tougher negotiator--so far. now apparently i'm not the only one surprised. when he gave his new storms on the fiscal cliff negotiations, well apparently john boehner was a little bit surprised. >> tim geithner sit there like we are here and presented this to you. what did you say? >> flabbergasted. >> cenk: flabbergasted. well, what went wrong? where do you think we are today. >> i would say we're nowhere. period. we're nowhere. we've put a serious offer on the table by putting revenues up there to get this question resolved. but the white house has responded with virtually nothing. they've asked for more revenue than asking for the whole entire time. >> cenk: that's just not true at all. he says we did this serious offer. here is the offer that john boehner put forward--butkis. nothing. he said, i'm interested in raising revenue or we're willing to do that. so how much, you want to cu
president obama said before the election? i'll remind you don't worry here it comes. my hope, my expectation is that after the election, now that it turns out that the goal beating obama does not make much sense because i'm not running again that we can start getting some cooperation again. hate to do it to you but wrong again, bob. it doesn't look like you're going to get a lot of cooperation. but then the radical wing of the republican party said no the republicans are being too soft and boehner is being too light on the president. his grand bargain proposal the republican counter offer to the extent that it can be interpreted from the hazy details now available is a dud. it's utterly unacceptable. it is bad policy and bad economics. that's the heritage foundation. they're saying it's too liberal boehner's proposal. that's funny. >> to think that the fever will have broken, you have this sort of tea party wing of the party controlling their party. i've said this before, what we need is a republican party. we need leaders that can control their party. >> cenk: yeah, it doesn't look liarlike
the election for president obama. acorn! let me explain acorn no longer exists. ifit filed for bankruptcy in 2010. these republicans are cuckoo for cocoa puffs. to say that the election was stolen is insanity to begin with. look, i think half of the republicans vote that way because they don't know what is going on. their pastor told them, or they think they're doing it right the other half are literally insane. we have 25% of the country saying oh, my god, 21 is coming and it's because of acorn and obama stole the election and put it on mars! you're insane! 49% of them think this. oh unbelievable! all right now we turn to the second issue general petraeus. now he was, of course, caught with the mistress, etc. his career is done. but before it was done, when he was in afghanistan and president obama was offering him as head job of the c.i.a. the head of fox news sends an fox news analyst to interview him and then delivers the real message. >> i got something to say to you, by the way. >> no one else was in the room i hope? >> well, directly to advance is-- >> i'm not running. >> that's no
turks." what do we have on top for you today? conservatives are livid about obama's budget proposal. that means i love it. >> it was not a serious proposal. >> i don't understand his brain so you should ask him okay? >> robert e. lee was offered easier terms. >> cenk: oh, are you hurt? are you hurt? we'll talk about that in a little bit. then the clash of the retail titans. wall part versus costco. >> costco in its new store. [ protesters ] >> all we're doing is speaking out about better wages affordable healthcare and better scheduling. >> cenk: who are the good guys, the bad guys, and we'll tell you all about it. >>> and then we're melting. >> the numbers are staggering. 344 billion metric tons are melting in antarctica and green land a year. >> cenk: that's amazing. we've got a lot more amazing facts about that, and it is not good news, unfortunately. what is going to be good news is the elbow of the day. that's nothing but fun. anybody know what time it is? jayar? oh right, it's go time. [ ♪ music ♪ ] [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> cenk: all right look at this crew that i've got
, even under president obama the middle class and the poor are actually going to get 75% of the pain in the best case scenario. that's why i'm against this grand bargain. it's a terrible idea. the people who gain are the ones who should now do that shared sacrifice. in fact, i want to show you about who did do that gain over the long period. this is my favorite chart. productivity i guess the yellow line and it has been zooming up. around the late 1970's, 1980, your wages and income have flatlined. you see the giant difference between the yellow and blue line? that is all that extra gain, income productivity that did not go to you. it went to the top 1%. so, if they gained then, and we're talking about sacrifice now, aren't they the ones that should be doing the sacrificing? why do you want to put 71% of the sacrifice on the guys whose wages and income have stagnated? that makes no sense whatsoever. what you're worried about the top 1%, the republicans saying boohoo they're paying so much, it is record high taxes, it is of course the exact opposite. we are right now when you look at
in the world. >> joy: i think republicans would have given her just as much trouble as they gave obama. what about dade petraeus for president? apparently roger ailes wanted him to run four president. listen to a conversation between a fox news contributor and david petraeus in 2011. watch. >> joy: you know, roger ailes says that it is a big joke. do you think he was joking? >> john: i would have liked to have seen him run before all of this happened. it is deeply embarrassing, discussing this with a british person, by the way, no offense james bond movie opens, our top spy has to resign for sex with one person. >> i did find it -- the head of the c.i.a. relationship with a woman and did it by gmail and it was found out by the fbi. it makes you wonder what the fbi is doing to the rest of us. >> so slippery, i don't want him as president. >> but the fact that he had a little bit of a different side and he maybe had this woman on the side, clinton left the white house with the biggest approval rating in the history of the wor
. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> it's time for the president and democrats to get serious. >> obama: i am ready, able willing and excited. >> he has got the republicans on the ropes, and they know it. >> the problem is too much spending. the problem is not that the peasants are not sending enough money into washington. >> the republicans are willing to put revenues on the table. >> we're putting revenues on the table. >> more and more members of congress seem to agree that we to have a balanced approach. >> you're not going to grow the economy if you raise rates on the top 2%. >> tax reform, ultimately will produce lower rates. >> medicare and medicaid are the main drivers of our deficit. >> are you willing to give up medicare and medicaid? big cuts to make sure that the wealthiest get away with the tax rates that they want? >> of course! >> obama: i'll go anywhere and do whatever it takes to get this done. it's too important for washington to screw this up. >> cenk: nonetheless they probable will. president obama came out and gave a speech that was fairly progressive, and he argued only for tax cuts
. they would turn to me and say please will you go talk to president obama and explain to him we're poor people, uneducated people, we're thought terrorists as if i could walk into the president's office. one man holds up a picture of his mother, 65 years old and he brought the picture to prove to me she was not a terrorist. so we're doing some awful things in materials of killing and it's important that we begin to make the moral argument, but also there's a security argument. we have taken, there are 100 bad guys over there and turned it into a million people who detest us now for what we're doing to them their community homes and schools. schools are empty in the tribal area because parents are afraid to send them to school, because the drones are over 24/7. it's not just when they strike and kill, it's the ongoing presence, who is going to be assassinated next. >> collections of people draw strikes. i wish we lived in a world where president obama would actually listen to a progressive like you, robert, but unfortunately we're not in that world. so now, i understand you talked to enron kahn
problem. president obama's drug strategy will try to balance er, enforcement, sanctions etcetera, with the importance of public health. part of that of course, includes the importance of quality treatment programs that work, prevention programs that can be quite effective. >>the messaging is good. and the recognition that this is very difficult and not simply solved, is very good. whether there are big changes, to how us institutions operate, the prison institutions, their drug enforcement, structures and their international state department, structures, er remains to be seen. >>what we call the war on drugs has been operated now in earnest internationally for fifty years. we have to acknowledge that we're not succeeding with current policies, and we have to think again. simply being tough on drugs, war on drugs, strong punishments, widespread arrests, this itself does not basically change the nature of the illegal drug market. there were real negative consequences human, financial and social costs. i think future drug policies should be based on the principles of human rights h
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)